The KM philosophy in the Enterprise
Am just sounding off here on KM.
I have been in this field for a little over a year..
Have been reading and hearing about how KM in major companies make a success of it. One thing that struck me was that although the philosophy upon which KM bases itself upon is Trust, Openness, Collaboration, within Enterprise success of KM is always associated with the Management who ensures its success.
Many people have said time & again, if Management does not "support" KM activities, then it will not succeed. Why does something that relies on a philosophy that is based on something that cannot be forced, have to be "driven" "supported" by Management. Why should there be the carrot & stick method? It completely goes against the very philosophy that KM is trying to achieve, isn't it?
Let the seed be nurtured, no immediate ROIs should be the driving force, let it thrive, grow, weather bad climate now & then, if it survives, then certainly it has weathered the storm and come up standing, if a little bent, so what?
What does KM's success mean - does the whole Company need to be writing, collaborating, etc? You need the suppliers as well as the consumers- the balance need not be constant, but can tilt at times for both sides, so then Why do we need to state that KM has succeeded or not? Why do we have prizes to award companies who have made a success of it?
If KM is community driven, then people should feel the "urge" within them to drive it, to contribute, to even show off, if necessary. Management, should not be there to nod their heads or give a pat on the back, they should be equal participants, jostling for space in their contributions.
Management support, comes in the form of channeling things = linear/hierarchical, then how does the collaboration = the round table scenario, work together to contribute to KM
My example of KM to be termed as a success would be based upon this example that I read of & I would surmise is oneof the earliest KM case studies : The Honourable Society of Improvers in the Knowledge of Agriculture, Scotland formed in 1723, evolved because the farmers were ashamed of the way the farms in Scotland were made fun of. The Improvers experimented with foreign technologies of crop rotation & enclosure, new tools, plough & miling machines, & they reaped their rewards in increased yields & profits. Eventually Scotland's farms become models of agricultural science, admired & copied worldwide;...." (as stated on pg.60 of Stephen Baxter's book "Revolutions in the Earth", 2004 Phoenix (ISBN 0753817616).
They did it all without technology, without "anyone" driving them, but purely on need based. That kind of co-operation could grow in a Company, where loyalty & mentoring is strong, passing on the values itself provides the support, without the Management's shadow. However, sometimes, given the competition that drives Companies today, Time & Patience to mentor, are hard to come by- causing KM to often be just another company process, rather than instilling the very philosophy & value within.
How can you drive or instill among the already "know-their-minds" employees, to share, collaborate, contribute, within an organization instead of with just their colleagues without the points and incentives? How do you maintain Openness in Enterprises based on hierarchy? How does Management itself become a participant, who or what drives them to want to change the culture?
